The Great Filter Hypothesis Suggests That Foregoing Patriarchy Will Lead To Human Extinction

The Great Filter hypothesis is one of the most terrifying ideas in all of science. We often discuss problems related to sexual selection on men’s web sites, but what is seldom discussed is how it relates to the larger schemes of science and life in the rest of the universe. The Great Filter is one hypothesis that ties up these loose ends.

It has been said everything we see as progress in the human world is due to runaway sexual selection, and particularly K-selection for sophisticated societies. As explained in The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics:

One strategy, named the r-strategy, imbues those who are programmed with it to be averse to all peer on peer competition, embrace promiscuity, embrace single parenting, and support early onset sexual activity in youth. Obviously, this mirrors the Liberal philosophy’s aversion to individual Darwinian competitions such as capitalism and self defense with firearms, as well as group competitions such as war. Likewise, Liberalism is tolerant of promiscuity, tolerant of single parenting, and more prone to support early sex education for children and the sexualization of cultural influences. Designed to exploit a plethora of resources, one will often find this r-type strategy embodied within prey species, where predation has lowered the population’s numbers, and thereby increased the resources available to its individuals.

Prey species are r-selected while predators are K-selected; could pushing humans towards r-selection be turning us into prey for the elite?

Prey species are r-selected while predators are K-selected; could pushing humans towards r-selection be turning us into prey for the elite?

The other strategy, termed the K-strategy, imbues those who pursue it with a fierce competitiveness, as well as tendencies towards abstinence until monogamy, two-parent parenting, and delaying sexual activity until later in life. Obviously, this mirrors Conservatism’s acceptance of all sorts of competitive social schemes, from free market capitalism, to war, to individuals owning and carrying private weapons for self defense. Conservatives also tend to favor abstinence until monogamy, two parent parenting with an emphasis upon “family values” and children being shielded from any sexualized stimuli until later in life. This strategy is found most commonly in species which lack predation, and whose population’s have grown to the point individuals must compete with each other for the limited environmental resources that they are rapidly running out of.

Seeing as humans seem to be subject to cyclical forces in history, one must wonder what the future of our species is since we are currently on the downswing of the great historical sine-wave and we are making a sharp turn towards r-selection. The prime reason we are on the downswing is feminism has unleashed the primitive sexual forces of women in the West. No society that has remained civilized has lifted restrictions on monogamy and female sexuality, as anthropologist J.D. Unwin found when he studied 80 tribes and 6 civilizations. Will we recover? Or, as astrophysicist Carl Sagan put it:

We’ve arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces.

Given the ease with which life arose on Earth, it should be common the Universe. In that case, where the hell is everybody?

Given the ease with which life arose on Earth, it should be common the Universe. In that case, where the hell is everybody?

The Drake Equation

Back in the 1960s, astrophysicist Frank Drake proposed an equation to estimate the number of societies that might exist in the universe. It is based on the number of stars in the galaxy, the number of those stars that have planets, the number of those planets that can support life and the number on which life actually arises.

Using this imperfect equation, Drake came up with a very rough estimate of anywhere from 20 to 50,000,000 societies potentially existing in the Milky Way galaxy. If that is the case—where the hell is everybody? Either intelligent life is exceedingly rare or exceedingly short-lived on evolutionary timescales. Enter The Great Filter hypothesis.

Well over 99.9 percent of all species that have ever lived on Earth are extinct

Well over 99.9 percent of all species that have ever lived on Earth are extinct

The Great Filter

The Great Filter concept originates in the argument that the failure to find any extraterrestrial civilizations in the observable universe implies the possibility something is wrong with one or more of the arguments from various scientific disciplines that the appearance of advanced intelligent life is probable; this observation is conceptualized in terms of a Great Filter which acts to reduce the great number of sites where intelligent life might arise to a tiny number of intelligent species.

Basically, it is the idea there is a Great Filter humanity will be subjected to that will lead to its downfall. After passing through this filter, humanity either survives as a non-technological civilization (returning to the cave dwelling life our ancestors if we are lucky) or goes extinct. It gets worse.

The main counter-intuitive conclusion of this observation is that the easier it was for life to evolve to our stage, the bleaker our future chances probably are.

Enrico Fermi was the first to notice the seeming complete lack of civilizations in the universe once radio astronomy began. In our own galaxy there are some 400 billion suns, and based on what we have seen with the distribution of organic molecules throughout the universe it should not only be possible but probable that life exists elsewhere in the universe.

Also, life arose on earth almost immediately after it formed which makes it seem like life forms easily in the universe. However, this fact is a double edged sword because we aren’t finding life in the universe despite exhaustive searches and improving technology. This means 9 out of 10 societies could be self-destructing once they reach a certain level of technology.

No civilization has thrived without restraints on female sexuality

No civilization has thrived without restraints on female sexuality

How This Relates To Us

Some scientists say we could be at the most crucial stage in our long-term survival as a species: the stage at which we reach interplanetary and interstellar colonization. Many societies could have developed up to our point in the universe and fallen apart soon after. It is interesting to note the U.S. has long led scientific exploration of space, but since the sexual revolution took root we now hitch rides on Russian rockets in order to fly humans into space.

Sexual selection is the engine that drives evolution to high levels of intelligence, and perhaps once any society reaches our level of development it eases up restrictions on monogamy.

This is risky business as we have seen since the sexual revolution in the West with falling birth rates, the exile of the father from the family, and the rise of degeneracy. J.D. Unwin found in his anthropological survey:

The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs.

After unleashing all restrictions on female sexuality, men adapt to the drastically altered sexual environment by learning game. But, this leads to an 80/20 rule of most females being monopolized by a small percentages of males. Betas, the bedrock of building and maintaining society then check out of doing grunt work since the sexual market is the granddaddy of all the other markets of man. Environmental conditions that led to the development of high intelligence and a high culture then self-destruct, causing the society to fall apart.

Implanted RFID chips are closer to reality than you might think

Implanted RFID chips are closer to reality than you might think

Technological Enslavement

Another worrying sign that seems to be coming into existence in the West is technological enslavement. With the advent of ever cheaper, smaller, and faster computer chips it is plausible that the human race will be enslaved by an elite. Perhaps this is why the limitations on female sexuality were removed in the first place. Man becomes feral after monogamy is abandoned, and is not able to organize the way he would have in an orderly, monogamous society to avert the threat of technological enslavement.

Forces are already at work to eliminate cash completely and put all money and all documentation on a GPS-trackable RFID chip that will be implanted into our hands. Japan is conducting its own experiments in this vaunted “cashless” society by using fingerprints. In any case, our lives are increasingly managed by computers and micromanaged by a government that manages the computers.

As the Financial Times pointed out:

The anonymity of cash helps to free people from their governments.

Aaron Russo warned us about this agenda over 10 years ago.

All money will be in your chips. And so, instead of having cash, any time you have money in your chip, they can take out whatever they want to take out whenever they want to. If they say “you owe us this much money in taxes,” they just deduct it out of your chip, digitally.

Using social engineering, Cultural Marxism and total financial control (all of which are advancing at a rapid rate) the human species could be transformed into docile servants of the state. This view, as pessimistic as it is falls in line with history. As Aristotle observed 2,000 years ago, the natural state of man is slavery. The politicians know this, which is why they lie in our faces and get away with it.

Work on the implantable RFID chip proceeds at a rapid pace. The only real boundary now is engineering social acceptance of an electronic dog collar.


Was baking a cake for your family really such horrible oppression, and is licking the boot of a corporate paymaster a better life?

What Worked In The Past

What these dystopian views have in common is they’re all illustrations of the value of patriarchy and the grand error of discarding it. Patriarchy, with its paternity guarantees for men and provision of a role in society other than that of a sperm donor and child support check-writer has led our society to greatness in the past.

The decision to toss patriarchy overboard is having profound implications, and it is not leading us to a better place as a society or as a species. The sexual revolution brought on the law of the jungle and the 80/20 phenomenon and is making the human species more feral with each passing generation.

What incentive does a man have to give a damn about society or sacrificing for the betterment of his offspring if he is no longer offered a seat at the table of the human family? Man is also becoming easier to boss around as r-selection breaks down the family, the building block of civilization; bossing him around is much harder to do when the family is headed up by a strong patriarch. The solitary individual is much more desirable to an autocratic society.

Perhaps the human species’ Great Filter has arrived via either de-civilizing feminism, matriarchy, technological enslavement, or an unholy trinity of all three. With a 99.9% extinction rate across a span of 4.5 billion years, the odds are not in our favor. Personally, I would prefer extinction to enslavement.

Read More: 4 Reasons Why Aragorn Is A Great Man

217 thoughts on “The Great Filter Hypothesis Suggests That Foregoing Patriarchy Will Lead To Human Extinction”

  1. This reminds me of the Calhoun rat experiments and what they imply about modern Man. If you’re unfamiliar, look them up. It’s terrifying.
    Ed. Here’s a video:

      1. Almost definitely, depending on what type of person you are, but knowing is half the battle.

      2. I am fortunate in that I haven’t been in a good mood ever. Nothing brings me down.
        It is the same way in which I have never been let down. Always expect the worst.

        1. Nothing brings me down.
          Do you drink a whiskey drink?
          Do you drink a vodka drink?
          Do you drink a lager drink?
          Do you drink a cider drink?

        2. LOL! there this cover band -nothing but 90s shit- called Stifler’s Mom. I wanna check them out

        3. They were a bunch of squatters, anarchist, smelly hippy types. I doubt they would have splurged on whiskey, vodka, maybe lager, definitely cider……

        4. @ghostofjefferson:disqus someone is in a great mood to be referencing chumbawumba, haha!

        5. I am, in fact, in excellent spirits today.

  2. While the numbers for theoretical planets which contain life in the Galaxy have solid mathematical basis, I don’t think they take into account the effect such great distance has on our likelihood of encountering such life. For example if a planet with intelligent life is observing us from 70 million light years away, they would see earth as it was when the dinosaurs still roamed. Conversely if we did observe a planet which appeared to have life on it, it would be quite possible that, that planet may no longer contain life. I mean, we haven’t, so much of the point is still valid.

    1. ..and pray that there is intelligent life somewhere out in space because there is bugger all down here on earth.

    2. I just made a similar point. And what most people don’t understand is that you don’t just have this problem with a star 70 million light years away. You also have it with any star about a hundred light years away. We are effectively invisible to any star that is outside the time span of the types of technology we’re using to try to communicate with them. And all of this assumes they’re even still using that technology, or ever did in the first place. Thinking about how quickly our own technology advances, a mere 20 light year difference could make it very difficult to communicate at all, even if we knew they were there.

      1. Yes I saw your comment, communication without some kind of weird sci-fi tech is virtually impossible. I wasn’t even considering communication.

        1. Personally, I believe that there is life out there elsewhere. When you think about the magnitude of the universe, it just doesn’t make sense for it not to be. But I find this topic fascinating for exactly these reasons.

        2. I like to say that the probability that extraterrestrial life exists approaches 100%; and the probability that we will ever encounter it approaches 0%

      2. I’ve used that reasoning on UFO types many times. It really pisses them off.

        1. Well, if this guy’s research is true we may really be facing a serious problem just now looming on the horizon and it may take our extinction to prevent it (It’s good to see people with their priorities well-ordered):

        2. can’t reason with them…only fight them in the octagon.

        3. That’s funny shit right on its face. Heh

        4. Oh, I don’t really try to reason with them. I like using them as foils to make points off of, for the audience. Trying to reason with the actual fool is nigh impossible.

        5. That’s my standard countenance when dealing with them.
          “Fascinating. You truly have a dizzying intellect.”

        6. Which part? The technology evolution, or the distance? On UFOs, I think technically (if you believe the tech exists) they could get here using technologies that get around light speed (wormholes, etc…) So maybe they wouldn’t be subject to the temporal limitation to visit as opposed to sitting on their own planet beaming radio waves at us.
          But, I tend to agree that we haven’t had UFO’s visit. My assessment is that if we had, we would almost certainly be enslaved by them now. Alternatively, in an era where the government is looking to scaremonger at any opportunity it has to grab power, every government in the world would announce the existence of these things and demand total control over every aspect of our lives so that we could fight them. Until that happens, I’m not going to lose much sleep over them.
          Though, having said that, some of the reports of these things are pretty interesting to hear.

        7. Tech evolution combined with distance actually.

    3. Perhaps we’re just an experiment to some higher intelligent alien life. They are observing us from afar and not make themselves detectable to us. Reminds me of a Star Trek NG episode that was like that.

    4. “I think the surest sign that there is intelligent life in the universe is that none of them have tried to contact us yet.”- Calvin and Hobbes

      1. I remember there was some scifi writer years ago put up the theory that there was a series of signs surrounding our solar system telling passing alien life forms to leave the locals alone!!!!

      2. Much respect to their creator- he flipped the middle finger to the internet- Calvin n Hobbes are only available in book form

    5. I think that was kind of the point of the Great Filter–that civilized life is only around for such a brief window, and not a long enough period to reach out and communicate with another distant lifeform before it is gone.

  3. Lots of good stuff in this article, but a couple of random points:
    1) – On why we have not found other intelligent life in the universe – remember that the universe is vast on a scale that is almost incomprehensible. Time is similarly incomprehensible on the scales involved. Remember that radio waves moving at the speed of light still have to travel for thousands of years before reaching our nearest star neighbors. When they get there, someone would have to detect them and recognize them from all of the other background noise in the universe. Supposing that these civilizations are more advanced than us, we’re also assuming that they communicate with radio waves and are even looking for this type of signal. Birds and insects are talking to each other every time you go outside, but you ignore it as background noise, and even in the rare instances where you stop to listen, you have no idea what they are saying, and at the end of the day, you don’t care. On the interstellar scale remember that even if you picked up this type of noise and recognized it as a communication, you would have to send a communication back (if you cared at all), and that would take a few thousand years to reach us. So just to say “hi” requires a timescale that is exponentially larger than the entire history of our search for intelligent life elsewhere.
    2) – On technological enslavement, I will be dead before I have a government chip in my body. But, if you don’t subscribe to my philosophy, don’t forget that there is always a way to game the system. Who’s going to stop you from getting a second RFID chip linked to a secret account where all of your real money is kept? With the government always looking at the official one, how are they going to know that you are hiding your funds? I understand that this is a cat and mouse game and that once the government realizes that the game is being played they will take countermeasures. But this is the way it has always been. Whatever new countermeasure they implement will also have a weakness to exploit. So, I don’t embrace this future, but if I were reborn into it a few hundred years from now, I’d focus on how to work around it.

    1. Remember that radio waves moving at the speed of light still have to
      travel for thousands of years before reaching our nearest star

      Our nearest star neighbor, Alpha Centauri, is 4.3 ly away. My guess is that it would only take, say, 4.3 years for a radio wave to reach it. Heh

      1. Yes, but light slows down when crossing through particles-rich areas (gas and dust) or when bent by gravity (modifies direction and disperses, losing intensity and speed in the primary direction). The effect is not noticeable for “small” distances, but becomes important for “bigger than a galaxy diameter” lengths.

        1. Thankfully 4.3 ly is way short of being the diameter of a galaxy. Well, a normal sized galaxy anyway.

        2. Welcome to return of kings everyone, we are either talking about gravity’s affect on sound waves as they travel outside the galaxy, or how to get easy pussy at the club…

        3. Fuck, yes, that’s exactly the vibe I get here, now that you mention it. Well put.

        4. In our warp, where time and space are one,
          We can no longer see the sun,
          In fact there’s nothing her for us to see,
          For light is nowhere near as fast as we….

        5. So you have an Alcubierre drive? Stationary, somewhere within the solar system’s “borders”?
          You get that thing far from us, or you’ll disturb our magnetic field and our gravitational stability. Ha! But your drive is itself a “black sun”, as you need an enormous negative energy density to make the device work.

      2. True. I admit my statement was over broad. But, let’s be realistic, the technologies we are using here are less than 100 years old. That means that any star further than 100 light years away wont have received any transmission we sent, let alone had time to send a response. So yes, there are some stars that are not thousands of years away, but my point, which admittedly could have been articulated better, is that most stars are out of range for us to even have initiated contact.
        So +1 point to you for keeping me honest, but I still say my overall point stands unassailed.

        1. Wasn’t disputing any of your point man. Heh. Just that one thing.

        2. I know you were just giving me shit. I’m a good sport and take no offense!
          Your point actually got me curious though and I googled how many stars there are within 100 light years of us. Estimates vary, but I saw a recurring figure in the neighborhood of 10,000. That sounds like a lot, but of course that’s nothing compared to the 100 billion stars in the galaxy, which is just one among 100 billion or so galaxies, so there’s a lot of stuff out there to explore!

      3. Closest star with “Earth like planets” is a lot further away.
        Edit, actually turns out there are some earth like planets 20 ly away.
        Who knew eh.

    2. On your second point, which I find most interesting, an RFID chip would, ultimately, be the optimal way to keep resources in the family. Say you have a blood line with a vast amount of producers and achievers. If the human body were to become compatible with a chip to track movement, and be specific to user, depending on the closeness in DNA strain, one could conceivably hack the chip, when a loved one is near death, to pass on the wealth sans will, thereby keeping all wealth, and potentially knowledge attained through life in bloodline, literally. If this does become the next phase, attaining new wealth could easily become a thing of the past creating a schism which will on onset increase the haves and have nots, but eventually just end vast civilizations leaving only those stupid enough to think resources supersede cultural improvements. Needless to say, I think the chip is a stupid idea. This is just one example of why.

        1. Not at all. The idea is easily manipulated and robs humanity of its ingenuity and “free will”.

    3. The universe is big…… very big…… scientists, whatever their level of intelligence, would have us believe they understand the universe. I am always laughing at their hubris. Are there any scientists out there willing to admit they know fuck all about the creation of the universe and why we have been given consciousness? No…… Prof. Brian Cox get in line you twat…….

        1. maybe on of you.
          I am still of the opinion that the universe ceases to exist whenever I sleep, sneeze or blink.

        2. don’t be insane, there is no little guy> When I stop looking at the fridge the light stops existing.

        3. That’s pretty powerful mojo you’ve got.
          Maybe you could help me get this song to stop playing whenever I walk about, I don’t mind the music, but the crowds, the crowds:

        4. If I didn’t sleep I would never dream and if I didn’t dream none of you would exist.
          I don’t smoke pot, so I probably can’t take this line of reasoning much further.

    4. While alien societies may not use radio waves for local communication, radio waves and more broadly EM is a natural function of the universe–stars, planets, etc. all emit radio waves, and therefore it is almost certain that other societies would at least be monitoring and observing radio waves from space, and it’s quite likely they would have something like SETI listening for us.

      1. True, but there is an assumption built in to your reasoning that any advanced society would give a shit about us even if they noticed we were here. There are cultures here that are insular, and it is quite possible that an alien race wouldn’t really give a shit about us even if they found us. Maybe they don’t need any of the resources we have because their technology has gone far beyond it. Maybe they’ve already found five other more advanced civilizations, and so discovering another to them is not the same as it is to us – it no longer answers the fundamental “are we alone” question. Maybe there is no point in taking to us because we are like cavemen to them and have nothing to offer them. Maybe they have more important things to worry about – for example, maybe they’re involved in a vast interstellar war with a different civilization and can’t expend precious effort and resources communicating with us when it needs to be all hands on deck for survival. There are lots of reasons they might not give a shit even if they hear our communications.
        And, as I noted in another comment, even if they are listening, given the distances involved, and the age that our technology is, it is likely that our first communications have not even reached them yet.

        1. Personally I feel that no matter how advanced they were, they would at least be curious of the unknown… I mean for all they know we are the Gods that created them, living light years away on a planet called Terra Firma… ha ha. But I feel there will always be the desire to seek out and be curious, at least as long as men are at the helm. I do think it’s possible they wouldn’t care about us after they discovered us, maybe that’s what happened at Roswell? They visited, crashed, saw how violent and dumb and barbaric we were, realized there was nothing to see here, and we’ll never hear from them again.

      1. Aliens take the average IQ of all organisms on earth to determine intelligent or not, feminists really are pulling our scores down

    5. The first noise they hear is high pitched shrill voices of feminists that’s why they haven’t come

      1. I think you’ve actually hit the nail on the head. If I was part of an advanced civilization and I looked and saw this, why the fuck would I want to talk to these people either?

  4. Excellent article, as is your comic strip. I do see medical nano technology coming into play here at some point. They can make sperm from bone marrow, and the japanese supposedly have developed artificial womb. Female embryos can be harvested or cloned. We could very well see the first human fascimilie popped out of a blender in 30 years. This will be weird indeed.

    1. sperm from bone marrow? Never understood why it was called “boning a chick” until now

      1. wait, so when I go to a steakhouse and order broiled bone marrow I am getting a cow facial?

        1. I know, just referencing Lucas’s abysmal prequels. Won’t be long before the Clones are knocking on the door and dragging us to the local detention center!

  5. Good article! Not sure if the theory holds much water though. Say patriarchy was instilled. As a cultural adherence it would be top notch as we would still get a wider array of lessons of humane living passed down as opposed to the hedonistic live for the moment, which is a very good thing. What your article dually states is centrifugal to what we actually want.
    A matriarchal existence only occurs in opulence. It then destabilizes the current environment into the skewed sexual market and can eventually create a poorer environment. However, the key starting point is opulence. This is juxtaposed to patriarchy where by competition, family units must be stronger because competition makes us poorer. That we have an observable opulence is evident in our rise in taxes, the amount payable to even menial jobs like McDonalds, and numbers of citizens entering college. Of course the numbers are mainly taking into account predatory lending and a gross push to keep up appearances while we continue to outsource and hope the internet and technology boom increases revenue, but let’s assume this is all working for us. We still are left with opulence, however unsustainable it may be. In fact many people from traditionally patriarchal societies come to America for that exact opulence.
    If you look at this further through the same lens, patriarchy is actually what will cull society. Many of the people thus struggling to survive, due to family ties or lack thereof, will be discarded. Income increases and the struggle to maintain a profitable level have forced many to move away from families. Simply to get family back requires resources not easy to attain. Just trying to get a grasp on the logic of whether patriarchy, if the theory is to be believed, goes in direct accord with crowd culling and should be adhered to. Seems the main problem here is less about there being a matriarchy, as we are still to date, not a species that experiences predators outside from our own resource coveting brethren, and more about creating a bottle cap on the opulence we have obtained so that our past strifes and current wealth can meet in the middle. Just a thought.

    1. Brother I’m fairly a neophyte in this anthropology field and I admit my knowledge is extremely limited. Nevertheless I have encountered quite a number of thought provoking articles and insightful comments like yours.So Kudos to you first of all.
      Anyway I’m very interested about the term “gynocentric”.
      Does that ring a bell? Some consider gynocentrism is synonymous with patriachy. And even a patriarchal society is imperfect as it puts women on pedestal. Your thoughts about this?

      1. Thank you. In most of my comments I try to apply a level of thoroughness I didn’t see in a thought posted before, as I feel weathering deeper opinions can help illuminate potential solutions and problems not foreseen on onset.
        On gynocentric, women centered, I have a bit of knowledge on it. It seems to occur in groups where specifically wealth and resources are available enough that hardened competition and violence isn’t as necessary. Also, as my prior comment mentions, hedonism is fairly well practiced. One of the key differences between a patriarchy and matriarchy, is the matriarchal system, while thriving on a lead, rarely ever pronounces the leader by name while a patriarchy eventually must name a leader. Most patriarchies also tend to rise and fall as a leader denotes factions, and in larger nations there are at minimum two generations in existence and one generation merely surviving.
        I don’t feel patriarchies put the woman on a pedestal per se, outside of as an aspect to covet favor and show fallibility to people who may not be so keen on aggressive progression. For those who wish to see their fellow human be cared for, having a woman’s presence suggests they can care for a human life, and might be trustworthy with another human life or even a society. Which is why most men have sought to have a stable woman by their side if they were looking for an influential seat of power. I think the woman by your side is a good thing as being distracted by chasing women and seeing prostitutes to sate your cravings is demonized and counter productive to the ‘larger than life’ perception needed in a patriarchy to lead.
        The biggest key differences is in a matriarchy the men are stated as a non factor but are expected to keep the system running as is, while a patriarchy both struggles to improve society, while pushing on without a clear way of getting a feel for the people. In a perfect society, there might be a meeting in the middle, but as humanity still has separate societies and much to teach each other as such, there won’t be a concise way to bridge the two. Good question.

        1. Agreed that patriarchy does not “put pussy on a pedestal”. Patriarchy values femininity. More specifically it acknowledges, nurtures, and celebrates the goodness that is the feminine, which is to say childbearing, nurturing, supporting, caring, pleasing. Indeed many great works of art and music were created by patriarchal men who were celebrating beauty and love that were inspired by the feminine. That does NOT mean that the feminine was placed above other priorities in the society, but merely that it was celebrated for what it was. Much as I would gladly celebrate, support, and encourage a feminine, chaste, kind, caring woman, whether or not I am chasing her. It is something to be appreciated, even if it is something that man helped create through rules and restraints.

  6. And who is doing this? We just assume this shit destroying our world is natural. What if it’s intentional? What minority controls banking, media, academia, and makes up 1/2 the Supreme Court?

        1. I know! I know! Pick me! Ooh Ooh! Saturation Ad Campaigns, we’ll just tell them all the cocks in their life stand up and take notice at the sight of their legs in nylons, and when they rush out to purchase that’s when we get all the $$$ back:

    1. “What minority controls banking, media, academia, and makes up 1/2 the Supreme Court?”

    2. The same people promote nonsense to unsophisticated American Christians that their special country, which they run properly while degrading other people’s countries, somehow fulfills “bible prophecy.”
      These Christians might imagine this country as a land of deserts and goats and rabbis, but it more resembles a secular advanced civilization out of science fiction. It has a company which can break into iPhone encryption, for example. You have to wonder what else people in this country can do.

      1. Thanks for this steaming nugget of regurgitated, pseudo-intellectual, Hitchens-Dawkins parroting, basement dwelling, neck bearded blather.

  7. The ‘Great Filter’ is Jesus Christ reentering the material universe and putting an end to all the happy horseshit. God gets sick of the crap long before any of this comes to pass.

  8. “Forces are already at work to eliminate cash completely and put all money and all documentation on a GPS-trackable RFID chip that will be implanted into our hands. Japan is conducting its own experiments in this vaunted “cashless” society by using fingerprints. In any case, our lives are increasingly managed by computers and micromanaged by a government that manages the computers.”
    Exactly. That damned RFID chip keeps coming back to haunt us. This was also discussed in anpther ROK article (by Thomas More) as part of Obama’s push for RFID chip for healthcare which could lead to the system getting out of control

    It’s Just A Little Chip

  9. Thank you so much for this article! It contains ideas I came to accept through my life experience, and explains them from a good, pristine theoretical point of view which is not only observable, but also logical (why is oppression sought after and why it is becoming acceptable to large portions of population).
    Once more, Relâmpago, congratulations!

  10. “The only real boundary now is engineering social acceptance of an electronic dog collar.”
    And it’s no boundary at all given how easily millennials and younger surrender their personal info/freedoms in the name of digital convenience.
    Great article btw, albeit depressing.

    1. Which infuriates me to no end. They have handed out their personal rights, info, etc. for security than bitch when cops in major cities are trigger happy.

      1. For me, the bigger concern are the video recorders in the them- people have been conditioned to think its okay to record anything. Unwitting agents for the surveillance state…

        1. That as well.
          Funny how the cops don’t want to be recorded but want cameras everywhere. In response the Supreme Court ruled we can record cops and they can’t stop you. However, what happens after the evidence room on the other hand…
          Also I remember a few years ago there was a big push for cameras in new televisions under the guise that the owner could use Skype and my very first thoughts were “1984 is not only here, it’s thriving.”
          I’m not sure if there are many TVs that still have them though.

        2. The powers that be probably decided that it’s far more advantageous to put one in everyone’s pocket, along with a GPS chip so location is constantly being broadcast.

        3. Excellent point. I’ve seen how cell phones are easier to hack than Apple and Samsung are willing to admit. The only way to keep your cell from being hacked is to take out the battery and limit what you do with it. Even then there’s a million other ways.

        4. They are dangerous on so many levels. Let’s just ignore the hacking part, which Snowden has shown your camera and microphone can be remotely activated at will, even when phone is turned off.
          Consider the huge data centers like the one in Utah that are recording and storing every bit of data that passes through places like Room 641A, so even if you were using, say, anonymous public wifi on an unhacked device, you’re still being watched. Add in some facial recognition software (which the CIA collaborated with Facebook on) and the hivebrain immediately recognizes and identifies you when you start a video chat from a hotspot in Argentina.
          I’m honestly surprised prepaid cell phone accounts are allowed to exist. You have to give up name, address, and SSN for a postpaid account, so anything you do tied to that number is traced directly back to you. I have a prepaid account (because it’s cheaper and better) but since I pay it with my personal credit card every month, it’s every bit as compromised. Just realize these things for what they are and minimize your use of them.

        5. I cant believe people bank from their phones. I think Cali just intro’d a bill that would ban pre paid cels btw

        6. Wow, doesn’t surprise me though. When I have to call customer service for my phone, they have no way to identify me, so to verify me as an authorized user of the phone the only thing they ask is “What rate plan are you currently on? $20? $30? $40 or $50?” lol I’m kind of shocked this type of loophole exists.
          It’s just like the gun laws, they will pass some rule that punishes the law abiding gun owners while leaving a loophole that allows a criminal to anonymously buy an assault weapon. The criminal class can just get a prepaid phone with cash or an anonymous gift card, and don’t have to comply with any privacy checks. Also prepaid users have none of the taxes that were 30% or more of my bill when I was with the big 3.

        7. Had a seminar once upon a time. First instruction is to turn off your cellphone and leave it in the lobby outside.
          10 seconds later inside and the first display on the monitors was the cameras of all the folks who didn’t surrender their devices as told.

  11. All this leaves me with 1 question, should I have kids or not?
    I should move to a traditional country.

    1. My answer to that:
      “whatever life brings you to do”. I still do not have children, I am hoping to find a suitable woman. If I can’t, well, problem solved anyway.

      1. Finding a suitable woman is the first problem. However, the child will only spend the first 9 months inside the woman, and after that must spend several hours a day in this sick society, so I am also searching out a more traditional and safe culture in which to raise a child.

        1. I get you. The West, especially Europe, is hell to raise children. The level of indoctrination children pass through is gigantic. You risk coming home and finding your own son or daughter plotting against you, propagating SJW decadence or simply turning out to be the loosers Society wants them to be. And then, you have the government directly interfering in your family, telling how much time kids should spend out of home, how much are their “opinions” valuable in family decision (removing “the patriarch” figure), how they should behave and what objects they should possess…

          Maybe Latin America? Japan?

    2. If you want a clan to call your own you should. Nothing is stronger than a clan of your own making. The question then becomes do you trust your own strength to create a strong clan.

    3. It is my considered opinion that having children in this day and age is so bat shit insane that if you are willing to have them you should be immediately institutionalized.

  12. Great article! Reminded me of this video I watched yesterday. J.D. Unwin’s assessment was spot on.

    1. Simple reason really. Women all want the best and strongest men. They don’t care who they are or where they come from. When unchained this covetousness leads cheating and bastard children. Why wouldn’t a woman seek to blow society up for the sake of her sexuality? If millions or billions die, why would someone who avoids responsibility care?

        1. Women with pretty eyes are to be looked at. The pretty eyes aren’t too perceptive for looking with though.

      1. yep and the fucked up thing is u cant even blame them. they are programmed to be this way! how the hell do u reconcile that fact? prolly by being strong and dominant always and never relenting. but thats on an individual level only. society will go farther left and left till we reach the orwellian premise in 1984 or islam takes over.

    2. That’ video is really a masterpiece. I’ve watched his other stuff but nothing compares to that brutal takedown.

      1. Right!? His video on Sweden provides a crystal clear picture of the bleak future for women and western civilization.

        1. I imagine that 2000 years into the future an excited archaeologist will accidentally discover ROK on some dusty old server and have a planet of the apes moment.

    3. dude this video leaves me speechless. my gf is from japan and ive gotten her on board w trump and anti-feminism but at the end of the day shes still a woman and by virtue of that cannot be loyal to me but only to her own biological imperative. hard truth to swallow

      1. It’s the bitter truth. As for your gf; hold your frame, don’t fall for her shit tests, instill competition anxiety, carry an abundance mentality and run a little dread game on her. However, nothing you do is fool proof.

    4. what i wished the video went into was the mindset that hinders women from having the foresight (or compassion) to not give a shit they’re leaving the world irreparably damaged for future generations. the narrrator talks about a downward spiral after the hedonistic liberation of women for 50 or so yrs. what he fails to say is that women are basically able to have their cake and eat it too. they get all the perks of liberation (voting, agency, sex w whomever, choice choice choice, etc.) and dont have to live w the consequences of their actions, i.e. they’ll be dead by the time their choices have brought down society and stronger civilizations like islam take over. thats the fucked up part

      1. Western men liberated women and gave them agency. Unfortunately, some of the blame lies within said men.

    5. What I take from that video is that it is up to men alone to keep their society from being destroyed. In the world of tribes their are no allies no friends no mercy and even your own females will betray you as you struggle to survive. No quarter is given, your genes your responsibility. For us men it is excel and be peerless or go extinct after being enslaved.

      1. True and sooner men stop giving women free stuff, leniency for tgeir actions and shouldering their burdens women will never learn true hardships and grow the fuck up

    6. women are just getting home delivery alphas as they turned into betas all men around them

  13. We could be experiencing an extinction burst. Everything speeding up like some kind of mad Tarantine isn’t good

    1. You certainly can watch something odd about the landscape (human or natural, and not only “global warming”). I like to travel and I know Europe’s older cities quite well. The amount of “change” you observe is always increasing (from ruined buildings that stood for decades being torn down to new neighborhoods being born in months), even the “ground aspects”, the (spiritual and material) roots of communities being swept away as autumn leaves.

      1. yes, the rate of change is probably the issue here. If everything stagnates and we become obsessed with conserving or preserving what we have then that can lead to decline as well – and many old societies have declined (spain/ greece etc) but we’re going through a period of accelerated change, and while it may have a certain momentum of its own, the idea that change is exponential probably reflects the fact that this is ‘forced changed’. I’d say managed change, but in fact it’s mismanaged. At least murder/suicides don’t usually get planned in Microsoft Project

        1. My thoughts exactly! One thing is dynamism, the other anarchy/chaos. A dynamic entity can evolve, but never altering its core definition (a good example being Rome, which showed dynamism in Republican-Imperial conversion, but did not withhold becoming politically and culturally irrelevant within its own Empire, in the late stages). Acceleration of change is a clear sign of chaos settling in.

        2. A dynamic society with strong fundamentals, social, cultural economic etc is what you want. Not sure anybody believes that what we have today. Even the MSM says we’re running on empty, but the response is always to pile on more and more coal, whether it’s monetary policy or progressive ideology.

        3. Yes, you could see that after the fall of the Soviet Union. Somehow, the “obvious nemesis” was the last and most relevant gathering point. A negative one, as it was made by “denial of an enemy”. Notice how, slowly, even that is fading away (a Socialist Bernie running for President WITH odds of winning…).
          Most likely, we, in the West, already didn’t know who we were, but still knew who we weren’t. Now, even that is more and more questionable.
          In the material ground, “middle class” is now a “low cost” Society (“made in China” objects, flying in EasyJet), growing unemployment and currency devaluation making anyone have a headache to keep his own “status”, let alone improving it and starting long lasting enterprises, like a business or a family…

        4. the fall of the soviet union was in some ways the worst thing that could have happened to the west, so much so that some conspiracy theorists still think the whole thing was faked to take over the West by stealth. That’s clearly somewhat bonkers but it speaks of the cost to western societies of losing a socialist nemesis against which we could define ourselves against in opposition, and more than that the removal of the great fear of a marxism takeover has in some senses permitted a soft-focus takeover by a progressive left that bears some similarity to the old soviet union in terms of marxist ideology. We stopped fearing marxism, and the result is we let our guard down. It might not have been intended or planned but the hard left benefitted from what was effectively a trojan horse effect.
          As for the middle class, of course they’ve been hammered. The banks now own their houses, and they have to work twice as hard to maintain the level of debt they’re accustomed to. Their savings count for nothing and their wealth is typically centred on houses they don’t own. The superrich are doing fine of course, as they always do in collective societies, communist or capitalist.

  14. I think most of us have come to the conclusion that we will need to tear it all down and start all over, a hard reboot of civilization so to speak.

  15. The Wrong Hero
    Imagine every man who frequents sites like ROK or similar to this decided to not have children. I assume the people here understand or are beginning to understand the value of the ideas that we believe here at ROK. Reading about awesome men who live by the principles written about on this site is helpful, but if the men here at ROK who live by them decide to have kids to show them directly by example would have a more profound effect.

    1. It’s not easy, to swim against the tide. It’s still better than drowning…

    2. That’s partly true, but our ancestors were great, wise men. They eventually spawned shitty children. I will likely have my own kids one day, but I would say FAR more important than having your own children is setting up institutions and societal rules than control female behavior.

  16. If this all comes crumbling down now it will be us who uphold, protect, and defend all that is orderly, truthful, and beautiful. If it happens later on it will be our sons. If we decide to not have children the game is all set and done. We should have children in hope that they can carry these ideas on.

  17. And that shows why I piss off all the feminist transhumanist women I know by insisting that we need a patriarchal transhumanism. Feminism has had its day – and it doesn’t work with any kind of civilization that makes sense and has a future.

    1. I find the people that are most interested in transhumanism are the people with the least self-discipline to just get in shape.
      They’d rather put fucking nano-robots into their bloodstream than walk to the grocery store.

  18. I come here to ROK to find, and join men that understand the value of these ideas, my son will join your sons, if we all go down in a blaze of glory than so be it. We will either all go down together or we will be victorious together.

  19. Am I really the only one who things that the end of the world is turning out just splendidly?

      1. Ah, there were a couple of good REM tunes. What about Stand? That one was pretty legit. Orange Crush was cool too. Shiny Happy People with its upbeat and almost cartoonish sounds came across as campy and absurd, but a closer listen shows it as being an existential masterpiece of the first rate. Also, their tribute to one of my favorite comedians, Andy Kaufman, the catchy tune Man on the Moon does a good job at pointing out the absurdity in the beliefs of most people. What’s the Frequency Kenneth did a good job of turning a funny story about some lunatic into a super catchy tune and Losing My Religion was anathematic of an entire generation…the last generation to be raised with old world values….
        Their personal politics and faggotry not withstanding and avoiding their stupid depressing shit like Everybody Hurts and discounting all the over the top pretentious hipster bullshit after they were big enough that they could fart into a microphone and make the top lists, they were a pretty solid band

        1. Your brand lost a little luster by saying you liked Stand and Shiny Happy People

        2. No argument from me. I’ve always been a metalhead and would rather put on an album and wreck everything in sight. I think it was their pretentious bullshit that turned me off back in the 90’s.

        3. Ah, come on. I didn’t say it was one of their best, but there is way more hate for it than there should be. It is catchy, campy and it disguises some pretty serious concepts of adult hood and love and depression in a song that is taken to be an anthem for cheeriness which is kinda cool. It isn’t as good as their other stuff, but it is better than at least 80% of the BS that the Beatles released. I would give it 7/10 as a pop song.

        4. yeah, the pretentious bullshit was annoying af but I like pop music and catchy tunes and when they stuck to basic pop principles they put out some solid music.

        5. I think your sentence should be a 24 hr ban followed by a weekend of camping in Strawberry Fields

        6. Yeah those were all good. So, who’se doing an article on Prince, as he was clearly right that 1999 was the last year anyone could safely and sanely party in any sort of dignified way?

        7. the hell with that. I used to live a few blocks from Strawberry Fields though. Best neighborhood in the city imho.
          Beatles blow.

        8. she and that russian playing a Bolivian were two of the finest bond girls

        9. How exactly do you combine safely and party and not end up with a bunch of elderly people having a bridge evening?
          If you party at least do it like you mean it :-).

  20. What a fascinating article.
    1) I have been waiting for an article that explains r and k selection and its application to human sexual relationships. It’s kind of a vicious cycle, because who wouldn’t want to live in a world with fewer stresses, and problems, which creates the laziness that allows feminism to flourish (and I would argue the modern stresses we have in a feminized society are worse)
    2) The point of how easy it was for man to evolve indicating a higher likelihood that humanity will be wiped out rings true. Humans have no real predators other than other humans, and even in cavemen days, as long as humans were in groups they were basically invulnerable, especially after inventing tools (although hunting a wooly mammoth was by no means safe). It seems that man evolved rather quickly and easily in the grand scheme of things.
    3) There are those who say great civilizations existed in the past, and point to stories of Atlantis, or to the Pyramids, which would be difficult to build today using modern technology to the precision that they were built, and have lasted thousands of years, while most modern construction falls apart in 100 or so. I used to think this was mere fantasy, but I see it quite possible that there were prior civilizations, then great hedonism and a fall into barbarity. Modern humanity today is less civilized than at certain points in our past.
    4) One interesting part of the Great Filter theory is that it suggests that females are the cause of civilized downfall throughout the universe. Whenever we picture alien life in our science fiction, the women are never portrayed as unstable, bitchy, manipulative cheating cunts. But perhaps the grays had it just as bad as we did? Did E.T. have to put up with chicks he wanted to bone sticking metal into their alien heads and carving up their faces and mutilating their flesh?
    5) “As Aristotle observed 2,000 years ago, the natural state of man is slavery.”
    Would like to know more of this. It certainly does ring true, and would help explain why groups like the Libertarian party typically can’t poll over 5% in elections, when they are sending a basic message of freedom that most people claim they agree with.
    6) I agree with the conclusion–extinction is better than enslavement. I do wonder though if it is inevitable that collapse leads to extinction. I have trouble seeing how humanity would be completely wiped out. Even in a nuclear holocaust, it seems that there would be some remote tribe of humans who would remain. But I suppose a serious nuclear exchange would poison all the air, groundwater, and block out the sun, and could wipe everything out. Other than nuclear war however, I see the worst thing feminism could do would be to shrink everything down to a small group, you know, one that must work hard to live, and therefore becomes a k selecting society again? And then it cycles again from there.
    7) Stepping back and taking a look at society from a distance, it seems truly insane to give females license to fuck and suck whoever they want. What’s the benefit, other than at best pure hedonism? The damages are real, and basically civilization freezes, if not declines at that point. NASA is a good example–you have to wonder how many guys didn’t pursue space because they are fundamentally unhappy, not getting laid, and feel unfulfilled in their life. This is kind of oversimplifying, but there is a butterfly effect / chaos theory kind of thing with female promiscuity.

    1. I’m thinking that some of the past civilizations of earth have been very advanced in ways that we do not fully understand as we lack their cultural background and understanding as well as values which are core drivers of technological development in society.
      Ancient Egyptians would probably not see a cyborg fuck doll or robotic pizza maker as wonders of technology.
      I wonder if the ratio of males to females in society is a factor, I suspect it is but coupled with fertility rate and twinning rate of the ruling population.
      As I suppose you know the most K selected groups are the least fertile and have the lowest twinning rate also.
      So I lean towards multiculturalism as being the biggest factor of them all.
      It skews the sense of fertility of the society as it seems to be that of the highest group taken to be that of the whole.

  21. Relampago, I liked this article, and want to congratulate you, but I swear you just ripped this word for word from jezebel’s article on it last month.

      1. That was supposed to be a joke. Out of curiosity I went to Jezebel and they are discussing:
        On second thought please don’t click on it. It says:
        Below is a video of Kylie Jenner that Rob snapped Sunday afternoon. In it, watch Kylie take selfie after selfie in the mirror—completely oblivious to the fact that her brother is not only filming her, but screaming, “Hey you,” at her over and over and over and over again. She’s not doing anything we don’t see her do all the time anyway, but from this angle—from Rob’s lens—it has became a hypnotic (and slightly alarming) exploration of vanity at its most privileged and rewarded.
        I’ve been watching it on repeat all morning.
        Fuck me.

        1. Didnt hulk hogan piledrive these clowns into oblivion a few weeks ago? what happened?

        2. That was buzz feed ? But who knows they are usually all owned by the same groups…

  22. Excellent article! And the very precise reason why we have to shun sluts and betas and shame them the they just go the fuck away and perish in some dark corner.
    I seriously call on each self respecting man with balls still working to mate up and make sure to do it right. Be ruthless in how you go about it, in this task failure is nothing short of betrayal of the human civilization and species itself.
    Find a virgin. Court her but make damn sure she knows what the score is, meet her parents, arrange it, wife her up and start making them babies guys!
    This shit ain’t gonna fix itself!

    1. Hehe who would ever wake her ass up and for what purpose?
      They will just wait 5 years and drop the box off in a landfill.
      And a fitting end it is indeed.

      1. Alcor has James Bedford, who went into cryo in 1967, though it “inherited” him from previous custodians (long story). Alcor itself has lasted 44 years already, so according to Gott’s Principle it has a 95 percent chance of enduring between another 14 months and 1,716 years. So it could hold onto Elaine’s brain for quite a while.

        1. They might need James Bedford for something some day, although I’m quite sure that he’s quite a sorbet by now.
          I seriously doubt the expensive and intensive procedure to wake someone up should it become available will ever be done for no purpose, and the subject will definitely have no say whatsoever into it.

    1. That’s on topic and relevant to remind us of what was and could and should be again;-).

  23. We are looking at this all wrong.
    This isn’t about “female sexuality”. It’s about resource management and distribution.
    Given: women have limited agency (ie they are reactive as opposed to active)
    Given: women have value to men
    Therefore: they should classed as a resource and not as an opposing force.
    To be angry at the situation with women is to be angry about the situation with famine, or a lack of land, or a lack of cattle, etc.
    Like nearly everything else, when we do not properly craft laws and customs regarding resource distribution and management, we end up with a disaster.
    As Roosh famously pointed out – the personality of women depend on the container they find themselves in. This itself implies they do not determine the container. we do
    So blaming women for filling out a shitty container badly is to blame water for falling through the holes in a cup. It’s ridiculous.
    They are what they are, and they will act according to their natures, some better, some worse. But when all is said and done, they are going to do what they tell them, they want to please us
    “What?!” You exclaim in outrage, “but look at how rebelious they are!” well where do you think they keep getting the idea to rebel?! From TV, yes, from TV programs, yes.
    Edward Bernays, was a piece of shit who came up with the method to convince a generation of American women to take up smoking.
    Who paid for it? Who asked him to do it?
    The smoking execs. The unrestrained corporations. The politicians who get paid to manipulate laws in favor of big money, big money that’s accumulated into old money for old families.
    “OK great”, you say, let’s pull out the torches and pitchforks and get a database of every wealthy bastard and the problem will be solved.
    Not so fast.
    The corps exist to make money, some guys have some sense of responsibility, others less so. But at the end of the day they aren’t going to fuck with anything that will end that paycheck.
    Which means the power is in the hands of the men. You can say anything you like, you can blame whoever you want, but at the very end of the day, if we did not agree to this, this would not have happened. If we didn’t allow corruption or indulge in it, then there would be no room for the snakes to slither.
    The real problem is spiritual. It’s about integrity, honesty and common sense.

    1. You are right women are a resource to be controlled and regulated accordingly for the health of a civilization and to ensure monogamy and to give the average man a shot at getting a woman, sex, and marriage and children.. and to give them a stake in society.. this is what all cultures and civilizations understood before the current Western, liberal feminist one.
      But cultures and values change.. as have those of the West. Your post above is too simplistic in its attempt to pretend men can just will women into submitting and obeying them. It’s just not going to happen in this day and age with the kind of liberal and feminist values most of the West believes in. Every civilization is built on myths as its foundation.. and values that cannot be proven by reason to be true.. but simply develop and evolve and become the “accepted” truth. In our liberal, secular, “enlightened” age, those myths and values are of equality, egalitarianism, “gender equality”, sexual freedom, feminism and female emancipation. These values are sacrosanct in the West, and no amount of arguments and reason will do anything to reverse them in any substantial manner. The liberal elites – men and women – in Western societies all believe in those values firmly and use those values to differentiate themselves and prove their supposed “superiority” to other societies and cultures where women are kept in line and their sexual freedom restricted.

      1. correct, the average man cannot do so by himself. But he can have an effect, if that isn’t enough, believe me I understand.

  24. It seems as if many of the comments on here have covered this, but I will say it very concisely. We are still cavemen, and we literally do not know what we do not know. To assume that we have the capability to seek out other life in the enormous milky way galaxy is a bit arrogant, and giving far too much credit to our current technology. We aren’t even close to being able to rule out life in this Galaxy alone, never mind the countless others.

  25. THREE PARENTS: two women – one man:
    On the two parent child rearing, I still think two wives with the absolute limit of ONE man or sire as the domestic patriarch is the ideal freestanding and stable structure. Two wives isn’t a harem. It’s not twenty. No man could wander the desert with twenty whining women but TWO wives actually make child rearing 300% easier. Here’s why: ‘down time’. It takes three legs to make a table stand and FOUR tits make a perfect square do they not? Down time – – when the woman is nursing or preg, she’s handicapped. Numerous duties are foregone and down time or ‘dead time’ of unproductivity results when the man has to constantly drop everything. He misses work and house projects go on the shelf. A 67 chevelle sits in the garage for a decade unrestored. The running back and forth and running in circles like a chicken with its head chopped off is stressful enough for a simple mono two parent family with children and many fall apart with the added attacks from the anti family forces.
    NOW look west at a poly community of ‘long houses’. Some go overboard with the woman hoarding yes, but typically a two wife household boasts a large mcmansion that’s handbuilt and rivals any developer built mass produced row of mcmansions built by wetbacks on borrowed money. The ‘long’ poly houses though are finer, built out of pocket and paid for. Tweaked and finished like pieces of art since dad the builder has no ‘down time’. Vehicles are tip top and you see many old tractors restored even.
    And there’s just enough ‘up time’, that is keeping your DICK UP. With menstrual cycles rotating between two women, you’re never stuck in a bloody week of mind fapping the bitch, no she can go out berry picking for the week and the other wheel fills in. The place never falls apart. Never an abandoned house with a note saying ”gone to my mothers place for some ‘me’ time”. All issues are discussed at the table with the other ‘sister’ and two women bobbing like natural hamsters will never agree to go stupid and both defect at once. They’re wed to each other as well. Three is a magic number.

    1. You must give both those woman the exact same amount of care and attention. Both most be treated equally, the husband must not pick a favorite which can be extremely hard to do…
      While two women fighting over a man’s affection would be nice in the short term, any man would quickly tired of two woman bickering, “He loves me the most!” Or bickering at the husband, “Why did you buy her something in town and not me,” or, “Why do you have sex more with her and not me?”
      I wouldn’t say polygamous relationships are perfect for everyone, there’s problems that arise in polygamy that don’t arise in monogamy.
      It’s a gamble. The Bible illustrates the jealousy of woman more then a couple times. No, they won’t go stupid and both leave, they’ll either lay the blame on their husband and bicker to him, or they’ll lay the blame on each other which escalates into a catfight of one trying to constantly upscale the other.
      It takes a very strong man to deal with such. In some countries that polygamy is allowed, the richest husbands often have their wives live in separate houses as to avoid such stress. No one can be angry if they live apart and all only see their husband a couple hours per day.

      1. Attention is three way, never void. Only through chemistry will any relationship develop in the first place. The women have chemistry with each other and with lovemaking, the chemistry of a triangle may go deep into a nonstop dynamo of fucking and sucking until the man rolls or remembers something more important to tinker with in the shed. The women always last longer and can finish each other off to their hearts delight. When they wake up, the gutters just got fixed and cleaned meanwhile. HA! That doesn’t happen with a mono arrangement unless the guy pulls money to pay wetbacks to do the gutters. Lovemaking I imagine would be nerve racking with mariachi music blasting from above the ceiling. Arrgh!

        1. But what if the man marries two woman who are both heterosexual?
          I guess you could go for bisexual woman, but that’s still risky. Many young woman claim to be bisexual because they drunkenly kissed a girl; they actually would never fathom having sex with another girl. You would marry them then they would pipe up, “You know, I’m actually not that into other woman.”
          (Edit: deleted since you were not comparing threesomes to mariachi music.)

        2. I completely misread your last couple sentences. I read that as you comparing a threesome in a marriage with two bisexual girls to mariachi music loudly blasting in a room.
          That was a strange visual.

        3. Marriage is a covenant that you make with God almighty, not the state. In holy marriage, you become ‘one flesh’ with your spouse(s). The term ‘lez’ or ‘bi’ doesn’t even apply in a poly marriage since the union is one flesh with one head, the patriarch. Don’t even call loyal poly women lez. All women are touchy feely regardless, but wed the union is sanctified and they belong to each other like wings of the patriarch. A body politik of one and it’s green light GO!

    2. I didn’t read it all but I think that some allowance of multiple wives or a harem should be included in our red pill utopia. Maybe allow 1 legit wife and a couple more on the side?

  26. Asking, “Where the hell is everybody?” WRT intelligent life in the universe is easy to explain without it being rare or shortlived. If we are average in the timeline, we only started transmitting radiation in the last 100 yrs or so. The nearest stars are hundreds to thousands of lightyears away, with life-capable systems possibly further. It is a function of distance. Of course any civilization a mere 200 yrs behind us, and 1000 LY away will not betray its existence. For those ahead of us, they would have to be ahead by 10,000 yrs or so, and beaming their signals directly at us, if they were even aware of us.

    1. I don’t think that people can get their heads around how BIG the galaxy is, let alone the universe. The chances of having two civilizations developing at roughly the same technological rate in the span of time necessary for one or both of the civs could actually detect the other is vanishingly small.

  27. “Another worrying sign that seems to be coming into existence in the West is technological enslavement. ”
    i live in asia. phone addiction here is 100x worse than anything i’ve seen in the US.

  28. “The problem is unrestrained female sexuality.”
    Translation: “women won’t touch me with a 10-foot pole.”

  29. I guess we need to build a starship and travel to the Alien Megastructure Star KIC 8462852 and see if its engineers have a patriarchal society.

  30. Aliens are flying around us in spaceships, fighter jets have pursued them many times, people have filmed them and photographed them many times, people have been abducted by them and then released, we find strangely mutilated corpses of cattle etc etc
    After that there are still idiots who claim that ‘we haven’t detected any alien life’ just cos they expect aliens, who have their own thinking and agenda, to do exactly what we would do: land in the main square of a major city and announce their presence.

  31. Patriarchy is nothing more but a lesser feminism. Patriarchy’s interests is still akin to nurturing and protecting offspring a very maternal nature. Feminism is just an upgraded version of patriarchy. After all patriarchy created feminism.
    Also advancement on science and technology is useless the way is headed. We could have been just fine dying early from disease or combat as long as we enjoyed the basics of life living in caves. If you took a knight from old Britannica and had him try out modern day in terms of what pleasures he got it will still level out to him and he would have strikes of homesickness just like how a lot of you miss the old days and wish it goes back to those times.

  32. Terrible article. Makes no sense. What makes you think there just HAS to be other life forms out there? Life is an extremely, extremely rare occurance. To have had something arise on Earth that can grow and make near-exact copies of itself (which is what life is) was nothing short of a miracle. The chances that something similar arises elswhere in thr universe is slim to none. I don’t care how many planets are out there. Besides, if something “lifelike” did arise elsewhere, it would almost certainly be unrecognizable to us, because it would be so wholly different from cell-based life on Earth.
    That being said, the author is correct about female promiscuity and feminism leading to the downfall of our civilization. It happened to the Romans, and they did not have all the technology that we have. Given our current technology and the nature of warfare today, our downfall could be a lot more bloody and destructive than the Romans.

  33. “Given the ease with which life arose on Earth, it should be common the Universe. In that case, where the hell is everybody?”
    Have you really not heard of the rare earth hypothesis? and is this “ease” really given? Sometimes I wonder if any of you would have heard of Darwinism if AnonymousConservative had never made a website.

  34. “With a 99.9% extinction rate across a span of 4.5 billion years, the odds are not in our favor. Personally, I would prefer extinction to enslavement.”
    The Great Filter is our technological bent.
    We’ve used technology for 1000’s of years to overcome natural boundaries.
    Think about Igloos and Inuit, we didn’t evolve there, but they thrived there.
    Now, our technology is disrupting every natural system on the planet, the CO2 discussion is only a small part of the problems we’ve created for ourselves to even survive the next 100 years.
    Here are just a couple problems…there’s LOTs more.
    We’ve killed half the wildlife in the oceans over the last 50 years.
    We are 7.4 billion now, with a 30% increase to 9.4 billion by 2050.
    Even if birthrates are below replacement level, the population of the planet will be as much as there is now, for 100 years.
    We have cultivated, or are ranching, on 30% of the Earth’s ice-free land (and most of it is prime floodplain territory, not the sides of mountains…).
    Commercial fisheries are due to completely fail by 2050
    Look up Dead Zones and see what we’ve done to some of the most productive ecosystems on the planet.
    “Jelly Fish Swarms”
    NOTHING we do is sustainable, and we have only technology to blame.
    Technology now overwhelms Natural Limits, and we’re pushing systems to the point where they will no longer sustain us.
    That’s why there are no “BEMs” or Little Green Men, their technology got them out of whack with nature as well, and they are gone.
    You WILL get your wish, humanity will be extinct within 100 years.
    Don’t Have Children.

  35. Excellent piece. It does indeed look like nature might not allow human society to
    advance beyond a certain level.

  36. K selection is the way. But as many noted, we need true alphas to be in solidarity to the rest of men. Even betas and omegas who are the building blocks of society will be included. In this scenario there is no “white knights”, “manginas”, “neckbeards” or “cucks”. Just men and their will to continue our species and society under G-d.

    1. Alphas will need an incentive for this. What do I get for stopping fucking with weak sauce men’s women? I’m serious. And I am more or less an example of whom you should convince…
      I’m K selected for my own purposes, I’m married etc. But it doesn’t mean I’m not still hunting… And to be honest I get a kick out of taking some dumb shit dudes broad for a spin. Just because I can.

      1. You sir, are part of the problem. And I am no beta or omega. I just realized that when claiming “pussy” as a prize, that is exactly what you’re treating it as – a prize. When in reality its just another gash. If you value obtaining some viral, wet hole over helping your fellow man, then I don’t know what to say to you. And please note, I am not saying we need to help awaken or hold up willing mangina beta’s to our standard; those “men” are lost and not worthy to be called men. Who I am referring to are men who have not yet found the truth yet, but will embrace it when it reveals itself. We must be that beacon of truth

        1. You are not addressing the problem. I may be part of it, probably true since I hog up more than one female at any given moment. But what I think is needed is a way to address this. Saying alphas should stop fucking girls they feel like fucking is not a solution.
          I read your comment and it in no way made me less inclined to hog women and fuck around as I please.
          I’m maybe not a good person etc but I’m still here and so are a bunch of other guys who more or less act the same way…
          And my motivation is not the wet hole over helping a fellow man, that’s bullshit, weak men need to be beaten if they don’t fight for what they have. Survival of the fittest if you will. Actually I don’t care that much for the pussy as much as for the win, the moment she gives in and you know you won.

        2. In no way am I saying that a man should not pursue what he desires. Hell, isn’t that what am this site is all about? And I’m with it. But after a certain point, unchained reckless pussy conquest will wreck the potential pool of nubile and fertile women who otherwise would of made great mothers and wives. It is almost as bad as unchained hypergamy for women (but I will say a man’s value is based on his sexual prowess so as long as it doesn’t disrupt society on a whole). And yes, weak men should be taught to take what is there’s; I’m not suggesting a trophies for all participant sjw mindset, but there has to be a balance. A constructive one.

  37. You are correct on the USA. But world wide the facts are at present rate 1 millions humans are added to the planet every week. Resources are limited. Space exploration is our only way to avoiding the great filter. Leave all the nuclear technology on earth.

Comments are closed.